Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Parallel GST proceedings are barred only when both actions concern the same subject matter, meaning the same tax liability, facts, contravention and period. Here, the later Section 74 proceedings related to Financial Year 2018-2019 and alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit on goods-less invoices, while the earlier Section 73 action concerned Financial Year 2019-2020 and different return discrepancies; the bar under Section 6(2)(b) therefore did not apply and the proceedings were maintainable. The Court also found that the impugned order had considered the taxpayer's reply, so there was no breach of natural justice. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.
Parallel GST proceedings are barred only when both actions concern the same subject matter, meaning the same tax liability, facts, contravention and period. Here, the later Section 74 proceedings related to Financial Year 2018-2019 and alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit on goods-less invoices, while the earlier Section 73 action concerned Financial Year 2019-2020 and different return discrepancies; the bar under Section 6(2)(b) therefore did not apply and the proceedings were maintainable. The Court also found that the impugned order had considered the taxpayer's reply, so there was no breach of natural justice. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
